This study investigates the effects of conversation type and the speakerís
gender on the participantís likelihood of listening and ability to recall
the conversation. The subjects consisted of 49 female college students.
Subjects heard one of four tape-recorded conversations, one-sided male,
one-sided female, or two-sided female-female, or two-sided male-female,
while completing a decoy questionnaire. The actual questionnaire was administered
testing recall of the conversation as well as inference information. We
found no significant main effects for gender or conversation type in the
number of correct answers or inferences evident in the questionnaire. However,
there were some significant results. Subjects in the male conditions found
the conversation significantly less violent than did subjects in the female
only conditions. Subjects in the male conditions also found the conversation
to be significantly more interesting than did subjects in female only conditions.
These results suggest that hearing a male voice affects the perception
of Mount Holyoke College women, but conversation type does not.

Method

Subjects

49 female students, generally, but not exclusively, between the age of
18 and 22, from the Mount Holyoke College student body.

Materials

A one-page article on feng shui, which is a theory on how the location
and placement of objects in a room affects moods and karma.

A 10-question decoy questionnaire regarding the coziness of the dorm space
and the desired positioning of objects was also used. This data was not
used to draw conclusions.

Four versions of a 3-minute tape recording a conversation of a couple having
an argument. Two versions consisted of two-sided conversation condition:
male/female or female/female. The other two versions consisted of just
one side of the same conversation: female or male.

An 18-question questionnaire, consisting of true/false, multiple choice,
and scaled questions, was used to determine how much information subjects
recall from the conversation

Procedure

The experiment took take place in a dorm room at Mount Holyoke College.

The participants were asked to sign the consent form before the experiment
begins and all rights will be explained.

After the participants have signed the consent form, we told them that
the purpose of our experiment is to see how the physical qualities of a
room (i.e. coziness, decoration, warmth, etc.) affect comfort level.

The students were asked to read an article on feng shui and given a decoy
questionnaire on room decor. The participants were told that they had 30-minutes
to read the article and complete the questionnaire. We asked them not to
speak to each other during the experiment.

After a 3-minute period has elapsed, they heard a 3-minute tape played
outside the door. They either heard a conversation that consists of a one-sided
female, a one-sided male, a 2-sided female, or a 2-sided female-male conversation
between a couple.

Immediately after the conversation ended, we handed out a questionnaire
without informing them of the purpose of our study.

At the conclusion of our experiment, we apologized to the participants
for deceiving them and debrief them by explaining to them the real purpose
of our study and why the deception was necessary.

Results

An independent groups ANOVA was used to determine if there was a significant
difference in the number of questions answered correctly between the conversation
type (one-sided or two-sided) or the speakerís gender (male or female).
The number of correct answers for the one-sided conversation (M=.61)
was not significantly higher than the two-sided conversation (M=.58),
F(1,45)=.40, Mse=2.89, p>.05. The participants who
heard the male speaker (M=.60) did not correctly answer more questions
than those who heard the female speaker (M=.59), F(1,45)=.03,
Mse=2.89, p>.05. There was no interaction effect between
the conversation type and speakerís gender on the number of questions answered
correctly, F(1,45)=.14, Mse=2.89, p>.05. (see Table
1)

An independent groups ANOVA was used to determine if there was a significant
difference in the number of inferred questions answered correctly between
the conversation type (one-sided or two-sided) or the speakerís gender
(male or female). There was no main effect for the conversation type. Individuals
who heard the one-sided conversation (M=.72) and those who heard
the two-sided conversation (M=.58) did not significantly differ
from one another in the number of inferred questions answered correctly,
F(1,45)=1.97, Mse=.12, p>.05. There was no main effect
for the speakerís gender. The participants who heard the male speaker (M=.72)
did not correctly answer more inferred questions than those who heard the
female speaker (M=.57), F(1,45)=2.28, Mse=.12, p>.05.
There was no interaction between the conversation type and speakerís gender,
F(1,45)=.67, Mse=.12, p>.05. (see Table 2)

Our questionnaire also measured inference by a using a 7 point subjective
Likert scale rating whether the participantís perceived the conversation
as very mellow or very violent. An independent groups ANOVA was used to
determine if there was a significant difference in the perceived nature
of the conversation (mellow or violent) between the conversation type (one-sided
or two-sided) or the speakerís gender (male or female). Individuals who
heard the one-sided conversation (M=3.57) did not perceive the nature
of the conversation differently than those who heard the two-sided conversation
(M=3.21), F(1,45)=2.09, Mse=.74, p>.05. There
was a significant main effect for the speakerís gender. The male speaker
(M=4.06) was perceived as significantly more mellow than the female
speaker (M=2.72), F(1,45)=29.31, Mse=.74, p>.05.
(see Table 3)

There was a significant interaction between the conversation type and
the speakerís gender, F(1,45)=4.58, Mse=.74, p<.05.
The significance of the interaction between the conversation type and speakerís
gender was analyzed using t-tests. Individuals who heard the one-sided
male conversation (M=4.50) perceived it as being significantly more
mellow than those who heard the one-sided female conversation (M=2.64),
t(21)=4.41, p<.05. There was a marginal significant difference
between the perception of the one-sided male conversation (M=4.50)
as more mellow than the two-sided male/female conversation (M=3.62),
t(23)=2.08, p<.05. There were no significant differences
in the perceived nature of the conversation between the two-sided female
conversation and two-sided female/male conversation, t(24)=2.93,
p>.05, or the one-sided female conversation and the two-sided female
conversation, t(22)=-.73, p>.05.

Our questionnaire also measured inference by a using a 7 point subjective
Likert scale rating whether the conversation was more unsettling or interesting.
An independent groups ANOVA was used to determine if there was a significant
difference between conversation type (one-sided or two-sided) or speakerís
gender (male or female) and whether it was viewed as unsettling or interesting.
There was a significant main effect for conversation type. The one-sided
conversation (M=3.98) was perceived as more interesting than the
two-sided conversations (M=3.25), F(1,43)=7.12, Mse=.87,
p<.05. There was also a significant main effect for speakerís
gender. The male speaker (M=4.00) was perceived as more interesting
than the female speaker (M=3.22), F(1,43)=7.96, Mse=.87,
p>.05. There was no significant interaction between conversation
type and speakerís gender, F(1,43)=.14, Mse=.87, p>.05.
(see Table 4)

We also used a 7 point subjective Likert scale to measure the participantís
perception of the realistic nature of the conversation. An independent
groups ANOVA was used to determine whether there was a significant difference
between conversation type (one-sided or two-sided) or speakerís gender
(male or female) and whether the conversation was perceived to be realistic
or fictitious. There was no significant difference between the perceived
realistic nature of the one-sided (M=3.72) and the two-sided conversations
(M=3.40), F(1,44)=.72, Mse=1.63, p>.05. There
was a significant main effect for the speakerís gender. The male speaker
(M=4.27) was perceived as more unrealistic than the female speaker
(M=2.84), F(1,44)=15.18, Mse=1.63, p>.05. There
was no interaction between the conversation type and speakerís gender,
F(1,44)=1.00, Mse=1.63, p>.05. (see Table 5)

Discussion

Are we talking?

Conversation type does not affect recall

Manipulation may not have been effective in evoking the bizarreness affect

Speakerís gender does not affect recall

It does, however, affect the participantís perception of the conversation

Participants did not listen to the conversation

May be due to the nature of Mount Holyoke College women

Experimental demand

Participants were intently focused on the decoy questionnaire

Tape recording may not have been convincing

?Problems

Experiment took place in two different rooms

Different people administering the test

Number of participants in the room for each experiment

Questionnaire Issues

Unsettling and Interesting are not oppositional

Not enough inferred information and perception questions

Inference and manipulation of variables were not successful because many
of the participants did not listen to the conversation